murphaph

Nice work Darius. Looks very well on the black especially.

Ah ok so your process requires one to paint the model anyway, just around the transfer instead of painting a block of white to be masked into text as described by David. Apologies I thought you were offering a paint free alternative through the use of white transfer paper.

Basically this is not a blog. It's a moderated forum. You don't get to write whatever you like. Same on basically any forum I'm a member of.

How do you seal the cut edges? I've made inkjet transfers onto white transfer paper too and have experienced ink run when I've cut the paper too close to the print, so I'm kind of struggling to imagine how it would work where the technique would require one to cut through the ink. Perhaps you could knock up an example? Maybe we aren't imagining the same technique.

This technique (using white transfer paper) likely won't work with inkjet printers because the ink is water based and needs to be completely sealed under a layer of varnish. You can't cut away all the white margin leaving just the printed outer colour because then the varnish seal is broken and the ink will run as soon as you attempt to transfer the decal. It would work with colour laser printers and white transfer paper as the toner is not water soluble and doesn't even need any varnish to seal it.

Here in Germany the shortage of diesel locomotives is so severe that hundred year old steam locos are being hired by various railway companies from heritage operators to operate trains, often on maintenance duties. Several electrified mainline stretches are currently closed or restricted in their operations due to necessary upgrade works. This is forcing a lot of traffic onto the non-electrified parts of the network so the demand for diesel traction is very high. It's not that easy to hire from abroad as the locos often don't possess the necessary signalling equipment but several mainline certified heritage locos including some steam locos do. An article in German here: https://www.notebookcheck.com/Verkehrswende-mal-anders-Viele-DB-Bauarbeiten-und-Lokmangel-sorgen-fuer-Reaktivierung-der-Dampflok-58-311-fuer-wichtige-Aufgaben.862071.0.html

My wife told me her internet wasn't working when she tried to start working from home this morning. Turns out it was her corporate network she was VPN'ed into. Down for the whole DIN Group both on-site and remote. Crazy how much economic damage one bungled update can cause.

SO atmospheric!

Thanks for the kind words folks. You're right Rich, I think it may have been Ian Rice that said exactly that. It's sometimes very tempting to just "freelance" the whole thing and slap the grime on but it will always just look a little bit "off" when it's done like that. It takes a little bit of discipline to look at some photographs and only take aspects from those photographs and nothing else. The only thing I haven't found concrete evidence of is NIR roof patching but it was common on both BR and IR with these coaches so it's almost impossible to believe NIR didn't patch theirs to some degree. I just don't have that many images of NIR mk2 roofs and I suspect not many exist. If anyone has any, I'd be obliged if I could see them. I would never pass them on or publish them. But I can't take credit for the window masking. I had help from my friend Mr. Laser Cutter It's a lot faster than using Maskol.

And a corporate livery pack, bit more rust appearing on them by the time they were in these colours:

I haven't tried it yet Al.

Cheers Stephen

Ah thanks. I was going to try a smallersize but it looks like it's not that this time. Maybe @BosKonay would be so kind as to take a look

Anyone else getting this: "Sorry, an unknown server error occurred when uploading this file. (Error code: IMG_20240718_173043_493.jpg could not be saved.)" when trying to upload pics? All around 13Mb in size.

You might say it's a model thread. I'll get my coat.

The buffer spacing was very different between the 121 and 141/181 on the prototype? I'm not detecting any heat or disrespect in this thread to be honest, just a good mannered discussion about the merits of both ways of doing things. I would counter the "sure we're using tension locks" argument by reminding readers that IRM provides an alternative to said tension locks by including much more prototypical coupling options in the accessories bag. The tension locks are fitted by default but the magnetic hose type couplings supplied with the new coaching stock for example are superb and far closer to reality.

No I meant the prototype.

Bump. I don't think so looking at the pics but maybe Fran @Warbonnet can confirm.

That's an interesting pic. Those locos were built on the same chassis right? The buffers shoud be in exactly the same place on the prototype. I guess MM went for GB spacing on hos early 141 toolings and then opted for a more protypical width on the 121s.

Hi John, I don't know if you mean me when you say people are getting "worked up" (you quoted me and then wrote that under your quote but perhaps you were speaking more generally at that stage). I can only speak for myself when I say that I am not getting worked up, just communicating my own sentiments in a calm and collected manner. I have learned that by remaining silent it is often taken as agreement or acceptance. I just want to give the lads in IRM my feedback. I would prefer scale buffer spacing on all IRM stock. If that's not an opinion that's widely held then that's my tough luck, and I'll work around it but if I don't communicate my sentiments to the company then they can't know that there are people like me who would rather it like that. That's all

The buffer is glued into a hole on the buffer beam. To move mine out I reckon I'll drill new holes and glue the buffers into those, assuming I can extract the glued in buffer cleanly. There is definitely no right or wrong decision here and I believe everyone gets that. The decision to produce these wagons to a GB buffer spacing is not invalid and genuine reasons can be presented for doing so, but as @DJ Dangerous says, perhaps there could have been some discussion here on the forum about it before a final decision was made. We have grown used to IRM wagons having exactly prototyplical dimensions wherever possible, so for some of us it has come a little out of the blue to find this change of tack.

I am almost sure I remember reading that this would be the case as it is basically impossible to hide the gauge/scale mismatch on a steam loco and it looks daft as you say so a compromise has to be made with most steam, especially ones with splashers. The buffer spacing is more of a choice though, to remain compatible with resprayed GB models or to manufacture true to scale. I can envision IRM stock displacing most of the resprayed GB wagons running on our railways in time so think the buffer spacing issue is less of an issue than we might think. In any case, folks could certainly continue running GB spec wagons in trains that only contain wagons with that buffer spacing and run scale buffer width wagons in other trains, if the mismatch bothers them.

My opinion, for what it's worth and without wishing to rub anyone up the wrong way, is that the buffer spacing should be to scale like (most, all?) previous IRM wagons. The correct width bogies under Irish coaches give them a very different stance to GB stock of the same design. Similarly, the buffer spacing is a distinct characteristic of a wagon. I understand that images of pre-production samples were published but without a scale reference nobody would have been able to tell that they were not to scale width from those images so I don't think we can really infer anything either way. I will definitely not be returning my Bulleid stock or cancelling my upcoming orders however. The wagons are far too nice for any of that and worst case scenario it's going to be a lot less work to move the buffers out on these rather than scratch build dozens of wagons but I think a poll on future buffer spacing might be a good idea here to get some feedback. If a majority prefer GB buffer spacing, then so be it, those of us who prefer the Irish spacing that we have become accustomed to from IRM will surely manage if that's the path that is taken. As MAL mentioned above, the previous poll was specifically on 21mm track, rather than anything to do with buffer spacing so a new poll would be useful I feel.

Ah that's a shame. I understand the reasoning though.

@BosKonay will this fulfillment direct from China be the norm from now on? I like it and it seems to work well, but we only get the tracking number for the last leg, be that Fastway in Ireland or DHL in Germany or whatever. That means in my case I only get a "your parcel is in Germany" and then 24 hours later the postman is ringing the doorbell. There is a YunExpress tracking number that would be more useful as folks could track the package all the way from China and know it's in transit. It would surely lead to fewer mails to support too. Would it be possible to provide this tracking number as well as the local number?